4 ms·
I don't follow AfD closely. I'm a programmer. But I just had a look through the latest AfDs and I have to say there's little I disagreed with. This one was spo
by neilk 15y ago
I don't follow AfD closely. I'm a programmer. But I just had a look through the latest AfDs and I have to say there's little I disagreed with.
This one was sponsored by a very prolific Wikipedian, though, who has a particular affection for the rule that one event doesn't make you notable:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Aliaa_Magda_Elmahdy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion...
Which is totally outrageous. It's tempting to conclude the nominator was just an idiot, or possibly pursuing some conservative agenda. But by Hanlon's Razor, I assume that the nominator was just less aware of this story than others. Maybe it's a good thing that such articles can be challenged. I wish it had been speedy-kept though; it's embarassing to have the deletion templates on the article.
There is unanimous agreement that the article must be kept, so far. So, the system is working. Kind of.
- ErrantX 15y agoActually; that is a prime example of where the deletion process is failing - because the only option is "delete or not delete". That article is a problem; if you read it, it is not a biography, it describes an event. Which, I suspect, is the point the nominator was trying to make. For a reader, the content is better presented in an article on Women's rights in Egypt (or activism in Egypt) with the title redirected there. Alternatively there is always Wikinews.
- bane 15y agoRight. Being able to flag anything for deletion, then going through the hassle of defending it puts the onus on not deleting it, not on those who want to delete it, which I think it wrong.
- sammyo 15y agoLooking through the list of deletion candidates I saw merging as an alternative to a delete.